Joan Of Arc

First of all, how embarrassed am I that I didn't really know the story of Joan of Arc? I thought it was about a girl soldier that was burned at the stake because she dressed up like a man.

This story is so much more complicated than that. This is a story about faith, courage, revelation, miracles, pride, power, corruption, martyrdom and enduring to the end. This is a story that is so astonishing that most should be thoroughly schooled in its details. It is very inspiring. In short, Joan of Arc's story could easily be found in any set of scriptures.

I find it interesting that Mark Twain wrote this book. He, a man of little to no faith and disdain for those who practiced it, clearly loved and admired Joan. Twain's familiar wit and satirical prose are all but absent within these pages. Instead, he writes as a man named de Conte, the fictional page and scribe of Joan, thus allowing himself to write with his own adoring perspective, without having to actually be Mark Twain. He called this the "best of all his books" and no doubt felt that way after a result of twelve years of research. As there is plenty of historical data available about Joan's life, including the full transcript of her trial, I have little doubt that this is a very accurate representation of her life.

On one hand, I like his choice in narration. As Joan's friend and scribe, Twain's de Conte manages to allow the reader to witness Joan's life from his own memory, a memory that included first hand accounts of most of Joan's life. And although his biting wit is extremely toned down, little glimpses are seen here and there through the telling of personal side notes.

On the other hand, the narration allowed the book to frequently become overly sentimental. Louis de Conte oft wandered away from the main story line to regale a story of the Paladin, or La Hire or his attraction towards Catherine de Boucher. In addition, I lost track of how many paragraphs were lent to remind the reader, once again, about Joan's saintliness. I feel it was unnecessary and writing it, over and over again, gave the book a "dumbed down" feel (which really is quite silly because this is NOT an easy read - I should have been grateful for any dumbing down). I think the caliber of her person, as well as her righteousness, were made obvious by her very actions, by her charity and by her speech. To point it out so often was overdoing it and eventually wore down my good opinion. I have a hard time loving a book that bored me at times.

That being said, this is an incredible book about an even more incredible historical figure. I could write and write about how much I loved Joan and her goodness, about her persecution and how much her story reminded me of Joseph Smith's. There are striking similarities, down to the resigned knowledge of their own endings. But they knew what they knew, they knew God knew what they knew, and they could not deny it. With their knowledge, they accomplished great works and forever changed the course of history. Read for yourself and become smitten with the power of a seventeen year old girl who became commander in chief of all the armies in France...because God told her to do it.

Thank you, Amy. I am so much more enlightened because you sent this to me. I can walk around with confidence knowing all I now know about the life of Joan of Arc.

Expecting Adam

Expecting Adam is about Martha Beck's experiences while she was pregnant with her son, Adam, who was born with Down Syndrome. She recounts incredible spiritual experiences that occurred many times and yet she still seems so unsure of any reason why or how or who. I found it interesting that she seemed content to still be so agnostic. She said "or whatever" so many times in this book and I wanted to scream out loud, "don't you care to know?" She has decided that the who, what, where doesn't matter and is content with just "is". I guess I have a hard time believing her considering how she was raised and what she claims to have gone through. I don't buy her happy rehabilitated hippy self. I'm not saying I don't believe her memoir. Who am I to doubt a complete strangers memories? But I'm dubious of her motives in writing this book. She seems like she is trying to prove that she is the very vogue "spiritual" person now and not at all the very uncool religious person. This will sound petty but she mentioned Harvard, by name, hundreds of times. Hundreds. But anytime she mentioned her father or where she actually completed her dissertation, she just uses the phrase, "at the university where my father taught" as if actually typing Brigham Young University causes her pain and discomfort or somehow isn't a real school. Why? Is it that irrelevant? She did the same thing with other places in Utah. I just thought it interesting that a place where she grew up and that she tried to distance herself from so much doesn't even warrant a proper name. Just a description. Weird. It just didn't sit well with me and cast doubt on her hunky dorky attitude.

She is a gifted writer for sure. Very funny and enjoyable to read. And I agreed so much with her thoughts on why we are here - to interact and love each other. I wonder what it would have been like to read this book without knowing anything about the author. Without knowing that she also wrote a book called "Leaving the Saints" (which I haven't read) or that she was Hugh Nibley's daughter or that she now works for Oprah (I tell you...the entire time I was reading this I kept imaging Martha Beck to look like Oprah's new "Dr. Phil" - it was very disconcerting). I honestly think I would have liked it better. Interesting how my own prejudices influenced my reaction to a book. I am tempted to read her other stuff. Advice? Warnings?

Emma Hale Smith - Mormon Enigma

I feel like such a history buff. I read this at Shelah's suggestion and I'm glad I did. It's true that history changes depending on who wrote it because this book has a very different feel than the Bushman book on Joseph Smith I read a couple of months ago. I think Emma Smith must have been a force to be reckoned with. She was a strong, opinionated, independent woman at a time when those characteristics in a female were much more rare. I would truly love to have a chance to talk with her. From accounts given in this biography, she was a very charitable being, a doting mother and well educated. Someone the prophet loved and needed the good opinion of. What frustrated me when reading this, however, were all of the second hand accounts of her life. She didn't keep a history or journal and the only time her voice is heard is in letters. Her later years, when she fell out of favor with the Utah saints, were tainted by reports of missionaries traveling through Nauvoo with an interest in checking up on her. She had no desire to be checked up on and seemed to make an effort to appear unfriendly and changed from the woman many of them knew and loved.

So much of this book deals with polygamy. I honestly don't know if I would have reacted any differently than Emma if put in her situation. I guess I'm glad I don't have to find out. It's interesting to me to see polygamy come up in the news and entertainment. As church members, we find the practice appalling because it is against the commandments....now. We distance ourselves from the fundamentalists who show up in the news and make comments about how they are NOT mormon. But it was a commandment at one time. Emma couldn't get her heart or brain around it and upon the death of her husband, felt she needed to distance herself from the leadership she knew would continue the practice she found so abhorrent. Others, like her, fell away from the church or were ex-communicated due to misunderstanding or unlawful engagement of the practice. Today, the opposite is true. And it boils down to faith in a prophet. Did Joseph Smith receive a revelation about it? Did Wilford Woodruff? Gordon B. Hinckley? Emma was so close to Joseph she must have saw so much of the man as well as the prophet in him. She was convinced that he was deceived regarding the revelation of polygamy...that it was not from Heavenly Father. But the twelve, most importantly Brigham Young, saw otherwise.

Oh...so much to think about. Thanks for the suggestion, Shelah. I'm sure I wouldn't have read it otherwise.

Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling

While reading this book, I think I recommended it to about every person I had a conversation with about it. Now that I'm actually finished reading it, I have mixed emotions. I'm not left with the feeling I wanted to have -- the triumphant "Praise To The Man" feeling. But I do feel grateful. Grateful for Joseph for the questions he asked, for the organization he established and for those early saints and their willingness to believe in what had to be SO hard to believe. Grateful for its continuation and the clear heads of the 12 apostles who didn't let the chaotic end of Joseph Smith's life translate into a chaotic religion.

The book serves its purpose - narrating the history of Joseph Smith's life. The author, Bushman, seems neutral throughout most of the book. He acknowledges early on that writing a true history about Joseph Smith is an almost impossible task. Defenders of his reputation write from the perspective of believers and disregard any story that finds fault with him. Other biographies are written by non-believers or former believers who have to discount any inspiration he claimed to have. Bushman, a believer but historian, writes Joseph as a prophet who made mistakes. I think that it is a fair assessment.

I started this book a bit nervous about what I would discover. I have never read much about him other than what the church publishes. The only bad stuff I had ever read was on the internet when I'd be searching for a primary sharing time idea. Googling can be dangerous. As I'd start to read, a sick feeling would start in my stomach and I would immediately stop. That was a road I didn't want to go down. I already knew most of the rumors but there aren't many "safe" answers to those questions in church literature. If you are not a church history scholar, chances are you don't know the real history of Joseph Smith. From primary on, we are taught his teachings, his testimonies and recalled versions of his early history. We are given a man who was a charismatic, beloved leader. A man who loved children, had a playful side and willing to suffer any amount of persecution to bring about the full restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ. After reading this book, I think all of the above descriptions are true. That doesn't seem to be a rosy, post-mortem memory of a man. But he was not perfect and he didn't always do things perfectly. There seems to be two ways of interpreting his mistakes. Either he wasn't a prophet and and the mistakes were a result of a fanatic with the idea of creating an empire and failed due to lack of experience and implementation skill or he was a prophet and tried to carry out the will of God without a full understanding of the revelations at that time. At least that's my interpretation. The revelations he received were not all neatly understood and laid out to him like they are to us in the Doctrine and Covenants. They came and he wouldn't always recognize immediately its meaning or purpose. That's what was the most enlightening to me -- the setting that the prophet was in. What was the feeling and atmosphere during that time? The mood of the people, the religious frenzy, the political climate? Reading this book really helps a person understand the mentality of all involved from the early followers of Mormonism to his persecutors. I'm relieved that after reading this book, my testimony of the prophet is not shaken. The stories of the "bad stuff" did not shake me. In fact, it helped me to understand the prophet even more. I finished this book tonight and I feel melancholy. I hated the frenzy at the end. There was such intense hatred in such normal people. I ache for Emma and her suffering, isolation and loss. I recommend this book to anyone who is curious about Joseph Smith and when and why he did the things he did.